Neoliberalism’s Agnosticism: Domestic and Immigration Policies and the Model Family in Canada and the United States

2009 ◽  
pp. 215-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lois Harder
2002 ◽  
Vol 96 (4) ◽  
pp. 871-872
Author(s):  
Leah Haus

Faced with similar economic circumstances, France and the United States adopted different immigration policies at various times in the twentieth century. Jeffrey Togman asks why. To account for this variation in public policy outcome, he points to the different structure of political institutions in the two countries.


2021 ◽  
Vol 18 (5) ◽  
pp. 519-532
Author(s):  
Stephanie Pedron

This paper examines historic federal immigration policies that demonstrate how the United States has rendered entire groups of people living inside and outside of its territory as outsiders. Collective representations like the Statue of Liberty suggest that the U.S. is a nation that welcomes all immigrants, when in reality, the U.S. has historically functioned as a “gatekeeper” that excludes specific groups of people at different times. The concurrent existence of disparate beliefs within a society’s collective consciousness influences the public’s views toward citizenship and results in policy outcomes that contrast sharply from the ideal values that many collective representations signify. As restrictive immigration controls are refined, insight into how immigrant exclusion via federal policy has evolved is necessary to minimize future legislative consequences that have the potential to ostracize current and future Americans.


2021 ◽  
pp. 54-85
Author(s):  
Elliott Young

Nathan Cohen, a Russian-Brazilian Jew, was declared insane and deported from the United States in 1914. After being twice refused landing in Brazil and Argentina, Cohen remained trapped on a ship in New York’s harbor with no country willing to accept him. Cohen’s well-publicized story reflected Americans’ fear of immigrants and immigrants’ difficulty navigating increasingly restrictive immigration policies. This episode also reveals how psychiatric evaluations were used at the beginning of the twentieth century to identify, detain, and deport supposedly “unfit” and “mentally defective” immigrants. At the beginning of the twentieth century, the mental hospital was by far the carceral institution most likely to hold both immigrants and citizens, and the rate of mental hospital incarceration then is equivalent to the rate in the more recent era of mass incarceration in jails and prisons.


2020 ◽  
Vol 31 (8) ◽  
pp. 987-1000
Author(s):  
Monica Gamez-Djokic ◽  
Adam Waytz

Across 12 studies ( N = 31,581), we examined how concerns about the rise of automation may be associated with attitudes toward immigrants. Studies 1a to 1g used archival data ranging from 1986 to 2017 across both the United States and Europe to demonstrate a robust association between concerns about automation and more negative attitudes toward immigrants. Studies 2a, 2b, 2c, and 3 employed both correlational and experimental methods to demonstrate that people’s concerns about automation are linked to increased support for restrictive immigration policies. These studies show this association to be mediated by perceptions of both realistic and symbolic intergroup threat. Finally, Study 4 experimentally demonstrated that automation may lead to more discriminatory behavior toward immigrants in the context of layoffs. Together, these results suggest that concerns about automation correspond to perceptions of threat and competition with immigrants as well as consequent anti-immigration sentiment.


2013 ◽  
Vol 11 (3) ◽  
pp. 789-807 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Merolla ◽  
S. Karthick Ramakrishnan ◽  
Chris Haynes

Immigration has been a salient and contentious topic in the United States, with a great deal of congressional debate, advocacy efforts, and media coverage. Among conservative and liberal groups, there is a vigorous debate over the terms used to describe this population, such as “undocumented” or “illegal,” as both sides perceive significant consequences to public opinion that flow out of this choice in equivalency frames. These same groups also compete over the ways in which immigration policies are framed. Here, for the first time, we examine the use of both types of frames (of immigrants themselves, and the policies affecting them) in media coverage. Importantly, we also test for whether these various frames affect preferences on three different policies of legalization. Our results suggest that efforts to focus on the terms used to describe immigrants have limited effect, and that efforts to frame policy offer greater promise in swaying public opinion on immigration.


2021 ◽  
pp. 233150242110357
Author(s):  
Donald Kerwin ◽  
Daniela Alulema

Over the last five years, the Center for Migration Studies of New York (CMS) has conducted four surveys of Catholic immigrant-serving institutions, programs, and ministries in the United States. These surveys identify the multi-faceted needs of immigrants and refugees, and examine the successes and challenges of Catholic institutions in responding to them. CMS administered its most recent survey, the Catholic Refugee and Immigrant Service Integration Survey (the “CRISIS Survey”) from December 14, 2020 through February 5, 2021. This survey explored the work of Catholic institutions during the Trump administration and the COVID-19 pandemic. The CRISIS Survey documents the reach, diversity, and productivity of Catholic institutions that worked with immigrants and refugees during a pandemic that particularly devastated their communities and an administration whose policies and rhetoric made their work far more difficult. At a time of rampant “Catholic decline” narratives, the survey also documents the reach, vitality, and relevance of Catholic immigrant-serving institutions. It identifies the obstacles encountered by immigrants in accessing Catholic programs and ministries — both organizational (funding, staffing, and siting) and exogenous (federal policies, the pandemic, and community opposition). It underscores the threat posed by US immigration policies to immigrants and to the work of Catholic institutions. Survey respondents reported that they offered new services during this period, such as: Financial assistance for families, particularly those at risk of losing housing or utilities. COVID-19 testing, education, contact tracing, and quarantine services. Mental health services. Grief support and assistance with funeral expenses. Delivery of food and sanitation supplies for infected and other homebound persons. Voter registration and Census promotion activities. Virtually all respondents provided services remotely during the pandemic. Many reported on difficulties faced by immigrants in accessing their services, due to poor internet connections, limited computer access, and lack of communications technology and training. Respondents identified several factors that negatively affected immigrants’ access to their services pre-pandemic. As in previous CMS surveys, these factors included lack of immigration status, negative community attitudes toward immigrants, fear of apprehension (particularly after traffic stops) and deportation, public transportation deficiencies, stigma over receipt of mental health services, and identification requirements to access public benefits. Respondents also reported on obstacles in working with immigrants during the pandemic. These included the pandemic itself, limited funding, demand that outpaced resources, government restrictions on relief and benefit eligibility, and (particularly for students) living arrangements, work, and family caretaking responsibilities. Respondents overwhelmingly believed that immigration enforcement, tied to fear of deportation, very negatively or somewhat negatively affected participation in their services and programs. In Catholic terms, they reported that nativist immigration policies, rhetoric, and media sources interfered with their practice of discipleship. One respondent stated, “Fear of ICE and round-ups, locally in our state and nationally, along with negative immigration rhetoric from the out-going president have made our clients very fearful to access services they rightly qualify for.” A healthcare provider reported that immigrants were “avoiding or delaying seeking treatment for COVID-19 for fear of apprehension and/or deportation.” Many said that enforcement partnerships between Immigration and Customs Enforcement and states and localities made immigrants fearful of reporting crimes or accessing government facilities. One said that potential sponsors feared coming forward to reunify with children. Respondents also cited as problems delays in family reunification, barriers to asylum-seekers entering the United States, decreased refugee admissions, and the Trump administration's rule on the public charge ground of inadmissibility. The report recommends that Catholic institutions take stock of the creative new programs, skills and capacities that they have developed during the pandemic and build on them. It also recommends that scholars and researchers prioritize independent, person-centered research that critically analyzes the work of Catholic immigrant-serving institutions. Such research would ask whether these institutions, in the words of Pope Francis, are putting “the person at the center, in his or her many aspects” and honoring the “fundamental equality” of every person. It would draw on the perspectives of immigrants served by Catholic institutions to examine the degree to which these institutions advance the rights, participation, and wellbeing of immigrants and their families in US society. Finally, it would analyze how Catholic institutions work with each other — within Arch/dioceses, regionally, nationally, and across these realms — in response to the cross-cutting needs of immigrants. The report recommends that Catholic institutions develop programmatic plans to ensure that immigrants can return to or can continue to access their programs and ministries as the pandemic subsides. These plans will need to combine communication strategies, financial support, and services such as transportation and childcare. In addition, Catholic institutions should make it a high priority to ensure that immigrants can access the infrastructure, platforms, and training that will allow them to access virtual services. They should also develop strategies to engage Catholics who do not understand, who ignore, or who work at cross-purposes to Catholic teaching and policy positions in this area. Finally, they should redouble their work with the administration and Congress to reform US immigration laws, and with states and localities to promote welcoming and inclusive communities.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kristina Brugger

In the post 9/11 era the governments of Canada and the United States are faced with the challenge of enhancing national security while maintaining the flow of goods, services, and people. In addressing this matter, Canada has confronted some difficulty in the reformation of its security and immigration policies in attempting to strike a balance between meeting the demands of the United States, while also taking domestic considerations into account such as respect for human rights. Given the high levels of immigration seen in Canada, many believe that Canada is leaving itself open to cross border activities that pose threats to national security. As a result, it is questionable whether Canada’s border management initiatives are properly equipped to combat threats to national security considering the effects high levels of immigration can have on border management efforts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document